Intel Core 5 120HL vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Intel Core 5 120HL vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H

The database contains a direct comparison between the Intel Core 5 120HL, a Raptor Lake-PS desktop processor, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, a Panther Lake mobile processor. While the 120HL has no recorded benchmark scores of its own, the 338H provides a complete dataset, allowing for an analysis of its performance profile against its nearest rivals. The data shows the 338H achieving an 84th percentile ranking among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 33,989, which positions it firmly in the upper mid-range tier of processors.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H delivers a strong multi-threaded performance profile, as recorded in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R23, the 338H scores 16,331 points in the multi-core test, while its single-core score is 2,044 points. This indicates a multi-thread to single-thread ratio of roughly 8:1, suggesting that the processor scales effectively across its 12 cores. The Cinebench R20 results follow a similar pattern, with a multi-core score of 10,213 and a single-core score of 1,441. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 2,504 points for multi-core and 305 points for single-core.

The PassMark suite provides additional granularity into the 338H's workload-specific strengths. The highest recorded score is in data compression, at 276,539 points, which vastly outpaces other integer-heavy tasks. Integer math scores 64,934, while floating-point math reaches 84,067, showing a notable advantage for floating-point operations. Extended instructions score 23,906, and random string sorting hits 34,082. The processor records 28,717 in the PassMark multi-thread test and 4,180 in the single-thread test. Data encryption yields 21,367 points, while physics simulation scores 2,697, and the prime number search test scores 304.

Relative to its nearest rivals in the database, the 338H shows a near-parity performance level. It sits 0.3% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H, which has an average score of 34,083, and 0.4% ahead of the Intel Xeon 6353P, which scores 33,844. The 338H is also 0.3% ahead of the Intel Core i7-12800HX, which scores 33,875, and 0.7% behind the AMD EPYC 4244P, which scores 34,220. These narrow margins indicate that the 338H is highly competitive within its performance bracket, delivering results within a single percentage point of several established workstation and mobile processors. The data suggests that the 338H is not a performance outlier, but rather a consistent performer that trades places with its rivals depending on the specific workload.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H compare to the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H in average benchmark score?

A: The 338H has an average benchmark score of 33,989, which is 0.3% lower than the 34,083 average score of the Core Ultra 7 165H. The performance difference is minimal, less than a single percentage point.

Q: What is the highest recorded benchmark score for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H in the PassMark suite?

A: The highest score is in the data compression test, where the 338H records 276,539 points. This is its strongest single workload result in the recorded data.

Q: How many threads does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H support?

A: The 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multi-threading. Each core corresponds to a single thread.

Q: What is the boost clock speed for both the Intel Core 5 120HL and the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H?

A: Both processors have a maximum boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The 120HL has a base clock of 2.60 GHz, while the 338H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a higher single-thread performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H records a single-core score of 2,044 in Cinebench R23. The Intel Core 5 120HL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so no direct comparison is possible.

Q: What is the L3 cache size for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H?

A: The 338H has 18 MB of shared L3 cache. This is the same amount of L3 cache listed for the Intel Core 5 120HL.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H demonstrates its strengths in multi-threaded and floating-point workloads, based on the recorded data. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16,331 and PassMark floating-point math score of 84,067 indicate that it handles parallel processing tasks effectively. The very high data compression score of 276,539 suggests that the 338H is particularly well-suited for tasks involving large data sets and compression algorithms. The 338H also shows a balanced profile, with a single-thread score of 4,180 in PassMark, which is respectable for a mobile-class processor.

The Intel Core 5 120HL, having no benchmark data in the database, cannot be assigned any workload-specific wins. Its specification sheet lists 12 cores and 16 threads, which suggests it supports hyper-threading, potentially giving it an advantage in highly threaded scenarios where additional threads are beneficial. However, without measured results, any performance claim for the 120HL remains unverified in the database. The 120HL also has a higher base clock of 2.60 GHz compared to the 338H's 1.90 GHz, which could translate to better performance in lightly threaded tasks, but again, this is not confirmed by recorded benchmark data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specifications. The Intel Core 5 120HL has 12 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. The 120HL has a base clock of 2.60 GHz, whereas the 338H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz; both share a 4.70 GHz boost clock. The 120HL has a thermal design power (TDP) of 45 watts, while the 338H has a TDP of 25 watts. The 120HL uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the 338H uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket. The 120HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the 338H supports LPDDR5X memory. The 338H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s, while the 120HL has no recorded memory bandwidth. The 120HL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, while the 338H uses PCIe Gen 5 with 4 lanes. The integrated graphics differ, with the 120HL featuring Iris Xe Graphics 80EU and the 338H featuring Arc B370. The 120HL has a launch MSRP of $279, while the 338H has no recorded launch MSRP. The 120HL is a desktop processor, while the 338H is a mobile processor.

Architecture Differences

The architectural split between the two processors is significant. The Intel Core 5 120HL is based on the Raptor Lake architecture, with the codename Raptor Lake-PS, and is manufactured on a 10 nm process node. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is based on the Panther Lake architecture, with the codename Panther Lake, and is manufactured on a 3 nm process node. The 338H's process node is notably more advanced, which contributes to its lower 25 watt TDP despite having the same core count. The cache hierarchy differs as well: the 120HL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, while the 338H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core. Both processors share 18 MB of L3 cache. The 338H also belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, while the 120HL has no series designation. The 338H is part of the Panther Lake-H generation, while the 120HL is part of the Raptor Lake-PS generation. The 338H was released on 2026-01-04, while the 120HL was released on 2024-04-07.

The Verdict

The recorded data suggests that the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is a well-rounded processor with a performance profile that places it in the upper quartile of all CPUs, at the 84th percentile. Its average benchmark score of 33,989 puts it in direct competition with processors like the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H and the AMD EPYC 4244P, with margins of less than 1% separating them. For users who prioritize multi-threaded workloads, data compression, and floating-point math, the 338H's recorded scores indicate strong capability. Its high data compression score of 276,539 is particularly notable, suggesting that the processor excels in tasks that involve heavy data manipulation.

For the Intel Core 5 120HL, the database contains no benchmark results, making a direct performance assessment impossible. The 120HL does offer a higher base clock and support for 16 threads, which could be advantageous in certain scenarios, but the lack of measured data prevents any definitive conclusions. The choice between these two processors depends on the availability of benchmark data: the 338H has a verified performance record, while the 120HL does not. Users requiring immediate, confirmed performance figures should rely on the 338H's comprehensive benchmark results. Users considering the 120HL would need to seek external measurements, as the database does not provide any. The 338H's 3 nm process node and lower TDP also make it a more efficient option on paper, but without 120HL benchmarks, the performance-per-watt comparison remains incomplete.